Duy Nguyen <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 10:52 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > It's not just sampling points. There's things like index id being >> > shown in the message for example. I prefer to keep free style format >> > to help me read. There's also things like indentation I do here to >> > help me read. >> >> Yup, I do not think that contradicts with the approach to have a >> single unified "data collection" API; you should also be able to >> specify how that collection of data is to be presented in the trace >> messages meant for humans, which would be discarded when emitting >> json but would be used when showing human-readble trace, no? > > Yes. As Peff also pointed out in another mail, as long as this > structured logging stuff does not stop me from manual trace messages > and don't force more work on me when I add new traces, I don't care if > it exists. I am hoping that we are on the same page, but just to make sure, what I think we would want is to have just a single set of annotations in the codepath, instead of "we can add annotations from these two separate sets, and they do not interfere each other so I do not care about what the other guy is doing". IOW, I found it highly annoying having to resolve merges like 7234f27b ("Merge branch 'nd/unpack-trees-with-cache-tree' into pu", 2018-08-14), taking two topics that try to use different tracing mechanisms in the same codepath.